The MATRICS Consensus Cognitive Battery (MCCB) is a gold-standard tool for assessing cognitive functioning in individuals with severe mental illness. This study is an initial examination of the validity of remote administration of 4 MCCB tests measuring processing speed (Trail Making Test: Part A, Animal Fluency), working memory (Letter-Number Span), and verbal learning and memory (Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised). We conducted analyses on individuals with bipolar disorder (BD) and schizophrenia-spectrum disorders (SCZ), as well as healthy volunteers, who were assessed in-person (BD = 80, SCZ = 116, HV = 14) vs. remotely (BD = 93, SCZ = 43, HV = 30) to determine if there were significant differences in performance based on administration format. Additional analyses tested whether remote and in-person assessment performance was similarly correlated with symptom severity, cognitive and social cognitive performance, and functional outcomes. Individuals with BD performed significantly better than those with SCZ on all MCCB subtests across administration format. Animal Fluency did not differ by administration format, but remote participants performed significantly worse on Trail Making and HVLT-R. On the Letter-Number Span task, individuals with bipolar disorder performed significantly better when participating remotely. Finally, patterns of correlations with related constructs were largely similar between administration formats. Thus, results suggest that remote administration of some of the MCCB subtests may be a valid alternative to in-person testing, but more research is necessary to determine why some tasks were affected by administration format.

People with schizophrenia-spectrum and bipolar disorders have difficulty accurately estimating their abilities and skills (impaired introspective accuracy [IA]) and tend to over- or underestimate their performance. This discrepancy between self-reported and objective task performance has been identified as a significant predictor of functional impairment. Yet, the factors driving this discrepancy are currently unclear. To date, the relationships between sleep quality and IA have not been examined. The current study aimed to explore the relationships between sleep quality and IA in participants diagnosed with schizophrenia (SCZ; n = 36), schizoaffective disorder (SCZ-A; n = 55), and bipolar disorder with psychotic features (BP; n = 87). Participants completed tasks of emotion recognition, estimated their performance on the tasks (used to calculate IA), and provided confidence ratings for their accuracy judgments. Participants also self-reported their sleep quality. These results suggest significantly greater discrepancies between self-reported and actual task scores for those with SCZ and SCZ-A compared to participants with BP. For those with SCZ, lower confidence on the tasks and underestimation of abilities were associated with lower sleep quality, while for those with SCZ-A, lower sleep quality was associated with higher confidence and overestimation of performance. Results suggest differential relationships between diagnostic groups. Future research is needed to further explore the factors driving these differing relationships, particularly the contrasting relationships between SCZ and SCZ-A.